K V SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By proceedings dated 22.3.2001, the first respondent-Union of India rejected the statutory complaint made by the petitioner against his non-selection from the post of Colonel to Brigadier, of course, based on the entries in the Confidential Reports with regard to the service of the petitioner, during the period from 1st September 1994 to 31st August 1995 and again from 1st September 1995 to 31st August 1996, with reference to (i) comparative table of figurative assessment of personal qualities by the Initiating Officers; (ii) comparative table of figurative assessment of demonstrated performance and box grading by the Initiating Officers; and (iii) assessment by First Technical Officer.

(2.) The Statutory Complaint of the officer has been examined in the light of his career profile, relevant records and analysis/recommendations of AHQ. It is seen that the impugned CR 09/94-08/95 is well corroborated and moderated report and is in entire conformity with the officer's overall career profile. No interference is warranted in this CR. All other Crs in the reckonable profile are also well corroborated, moderated reports and do not merit interference. 3. The officer has not been placed in an acceptable grade for promotion to the rank of Brig. due to his overall profile and comparative merit. 4. The Central Govt., therefore, rejects the Statutory Complaint dated 12th September, 2000, submitted by IC-27159P, Col KV Singh, EME against supersession. By order and in the name of the President. sd. (Gurdial Singh) (Under Secretary to the Government of India)"

(3.) It is well settled in law that, in the case of charges framed in a disciplinary enquiry, the court can interfere only if on the charges framed (read with imputation or particulars of the charges, if any) no misconduct or other irregularity alleged can be said to have been made out or the charges framed are contrary to any law. At this stage, the Court has no jurisdiction to go into the correctness or truth of the charges. The Court cannot take over the functions of the disciplinary authority. The truth or otherwise of the charges is a matter for the disciplinary authority to go into. Indeed, even after the conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings, if the matter comes to court or tribunal, they have no jurisdiction to look into the truth of the charges or into the correctness of the findings recorded by the disciplinary authority or the appellate authority as the case may be. The function of the court/tribunal is one of judicial review. Judicial review, it is trite, is not directed against the decision but is confined to the decision-making process, vide Union of India VS. Upendra Singh, (1994) 3 SCC 357.